An estimate for cirrhosis mortality is not automatically an estimate for whiskey consumption or for the total effects of Prohibition.
Mortality data can still provide informative indirect evidence when measurement, lags and model assumptions are explicit.
Keep the measured outcome, proxy limitations and inferential scope explicit when presenting historical policy evidence.
Single-study methodological interpretation; do not promote to a general historical verdict.
No access
Atomic idea
An estimate for cirrhosis mortality is not automatically an estimate for whiskey consumption or for the total effects of Prohibition.
Reasoning
A proxy outcome measures only part of a historical question. Mortality can change with timing, demography, diagnosis and modeling choices as well as alcohol consumption. The Dills–Miron models therefore cannot support a whiskey-specific percentage or a total policy-benefit judgment without further evidence.
Provenance
Connections
Connect to Prohibition history and evidence assessment. This is a methodological distinction, not proof that Prohibition had no effect.